Talk:Croatia national football team/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

This article needs a thorough edit/clean-up to maintain Good Article status

Hi folks. I originally curated most of the content on this article many years back, leading to its listing as a 'Good Article'. Glad to see that it has attracted a lot of attention and page views since the recent World Cup success, but I have also noticed it has become extremely cluttered and diluted with unnecessary content. The introduction (text before any of the headings) is littered with all sorts of useless information, such as this:

"As the country's most popular sport, football is played across all age groups and at all levels throughout Croatia and its territories."

Keep this in the article titled 'Football in Croatia'. This article is specifically about the national team, not the history of the sport.

"Among a variety of nicknames, the team is colloquially known as the Vatreni ("Blazers" or "Fiery Ones"), the Vatra ("Fire" or "Inferno") or the Kockasti ("Chequered"). In the Italian-speaking counties the team is similarly known as Il furioso incendio ("The Blazing Fire")"

I hate to be rude, but what relevance does an Italian nickname have on an article about the Croatian team? This is completely irrelevant and useless information. I've also never, in my entire lifetime of watching football, seen the team referred to as simply Vatra (the fire). The list goes on and on. The worst part is the recent history at the world cup, where every match is talked about in completely unnecessary detail. As a reminder, Wikipedia is about collaborating the facts, not going into detail on every individual moment in the match. There's no need to mention something specific such as the fact that Trippier scored against Croatia, or the ball accidentally grazed Mandzukic's head for an own goal. This isn't a match report or pundit analysis. This article is in need of a serious cleanup in order to maintain good article status. I will be dedicating some time over the coming days/weeks to make it happen. If you have any objections or suggestions, please leave them here. Domiy (talk) 11:04, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Domiy: Disagree. I, like yourself, have taken and contributed to many Good Articles. This has received a lot of attention because of the World Cup and rightly so. Please remember that your contributions in the past, does not entitle you to contributions in the future. As for the nicknames, any such names are usually taken from this list (the link that directs from the word 'nicknames' on the infobx}. There are certainly issues with WP:RECENTISM but that can be fixed easily. I have watched a lot of Croatian football games in my day. Let me tell you, sitting at the Italian-speaking bars of Pula, Croatia and the surrounding Italian-spaking regions, the term Il furioso incendio is used all the time, both by Italian and Croatian media. Not to mention it was merely copied from the aforementioned list. There are many, many alternatives to the nicknames of this national team. When you say 'I hate to be rude' I don't understand what that means. What are you being rude about? Are you unaware that Croatia is a multi-lingual state? I'm sure you're not. I hope you do spend the next coming days/weeks contributing to this article! However, expect other editors including myself to want to discuss–at times in painstaking detail–all the edits you make. Also, stay away from titling your post "This article needs a thorough edit/clean-up to maintain Good Article status" when all you list is the need to trim on details and express some opinions. That is dangerously close to reportable ownership behaviour. If you want, a title of "Improving the article" might be more appropriate. Lets worth together with all the editors who have taken the time out of their day to improve this article. For example, instead of saying "As the country's most popular sport, football is played across all age groups and at all levels throughout Croatia and its territories" belongs on the football in Croatia article, I'd like to see how we can incorporate that into the article. An improve not remove perspective. Perhaps, "As the country's most popular sport, the national team is.. this or has... a large supporter base... or whatever. All the best, LivinRealGüd (talk) 15:25, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Nice edits here. LivinRealGüd (talk) 13:22, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you! More incoming, feel free to suggest or dispute anything. Domiy (talk) 02:19, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

@Domiy: the main things I'd like to see is evenly proportioned paragraphs in the lead i.e. same amount of sentences in the first paragraph as the second, third and fourth, so it doesn't look lop-sided. Also keeping the number of headings to a minimum would be great. I took a gander at your submission to Good Article status in 2008, and it looks like you'd agree with me on that as well. The big things are trimming content, rewording, and formatting, in my opinion. I really like how a couple tables are formatted at France national football team#Statistics, so I'm going to see how I can emulate that. Another concern is Wikipedia:Notability and WP:EXCESSDETAIL on certain content–again, easily fixed. LivinRealGüd (talk) 06:38, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

@LivinRealGüd: Noted. I have redone a few sentences in the intro which makes all paragraphs look even. Also note recent changes in the Supporters section, such as moving the instances of violent behaviour to the bottom as they are not the key focus of the section. I also added in a few sentences regarding popular supporter chants. What do you think about an audio clip of these chants? These are definitely relevant as Croatian fans have become notable for largely orchestrated chants during matches. It wouldn't be difficult to snip the audio from an existing video. Thoughts? I'd also like to look for a new image of the use of flares; I supplied the current one many years ago although it is not a good photo and does not show the context well. Alternatively I'd like to use a photo illustrating the habit of writing the name of a city onto the Croatian flag, which supporters often do at matches to show their origin. Happy to hear your thoughts. Domiy (talk) 06:17, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

@Domiy: Sweet. The lead looks great. We should also look into the logo situation (see discussion below), I understand its okay to not have one but it certainly looked better with one. The supporter chants audio idea is a fantastic idea! As for the flare image, agreed. Looks good for what it is. I'm sure there are better quality ones out there. Croatians really love their fireworks and pyrotechnics. Yes indeed, do use a photo illustrating the habit of writing the name of a city onto the Croatian flag. I saw a bunch of those at the 2018 World Cup. I'll see what I can dig up, but I'm sure you could scramble something better. On my end I did some reformatting and finished highlighting the statistics section. I don't think were at the place where "History of the Croatia national team" article is need, but we're fast approaching. I sectioned off a new article called Croatia national football team kit history to accommodate all that information. Next up I think is the supporters section, it would be best if we could group everything below the fourth paragraph in that section accordingly. Lets put the issues regarding flare usage at the bottom and couple the incidents with games against Italy and Serbia together as they follow a similar theme: things supports should not be doing. LivinRealGüd (talk) 06:47, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

@LivinRealGüd: I'll look into it! I had problems getting this article to pass as a Featured Article predominantly because of disputes over logo rights - if we can get it sorted it might have a chance!. Tbh I kind of gave up on the whole image licensing thing - it's not my strong area :P I'll see what media I can find for the Supporters section. I think a few sentences in this section could also be restructured to make it shorter and more direct - instead of going into detail about individual incidents, we could just combine them into a few generic sentences. I fear that this section is a little long, and although the incidents are worth mentioning they are not representative of Croatian fans and their reputation. Most incidents were acts of intentional sabotage against the HNS and Zdravko Mamic - who has since been convicted and fled the country. The media supports this. To that end I'd like to refer to them as 'spectators' or 'perpetrators' as they are not technically supporters, they are are against the team! I'll read over this section a few more times to see what (if anything) can be done to reflect this (maybe I'm just being picky). Happy for suggestions.

Hahah, "they are not technically supporters, they are are against the team". I actually laughed out loud on that one. You're totally right, these supporters are certainly not supporting the team. As for the image, I'm seeing a bunch of article without a logo but I'm also seeing a lot with. For example in the discussion below we see that Croatia national football team is not allowed to have the logo it did because its only licensed for the Croatian Football Federation. Yet, we see the same thing happening France national football team (with French Football Federation)... Anyway we need to figure out how the Spain national football team and Germany national football team got their licenses as they seem to have it right. LivinRealGüd (talk) 04:55, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

It looks like the problem is that the Croatian jersey contains the HNS logo. For other teams, such as Spain and Germany, the crest used on the jersey is not the logo of the football federation, but a separate, unique symbol all together. To that end, it looks like were out of options with this : ( It's not a deal breaker though. The article already has plenty of relevant images, and if we can get an audio clip of a chant as previously mentioned then it would more than make up for not having a sandbox logo image. This article is already miles better (more detailed, better written, more images etc) than most articles for other national teams, including Scotland national football team which is a featured article! Domiy (talk) 05:18, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

@Domiy: wait a second, I think they might be two different logos...? I think this one is for the Croatian Football Federation and this one is for the national football team. Looking through all these documents and the jerseys at the 2018 World Cup, (e.g. this one) you can see a marked difference. Do you think we can upload the lighter version under WP:NFCC#4 with the official licensing site as a source? LivinRealGüd (talk) 13:41, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

@LivinRealGüd: Sorry, I can't view any of the files you linked, they take me to an error page :( Either way I'm not aware of any differences between the HNS logo and jersey crest. Are you simply referring to the slightly different colour shades? If so I don't think that would constitute a difference. As per the Croatian jersey crest and official HNS website, it looks like the two are identical. Domiy (talk) 23:58, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

Ah shoot, that was what I was referring to. Okay well let finish the more important things first before revising the logo thing once more. LivinRealGüd (talk) 00:01, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

You seem to know more about image licensing than I do; are we able to use a photo of the team's homecoming parade in Zagreb? I've seen some really nice photos showing their widespread support which would definitely be relevant for use. As per Spain national football team it is usually very common to show homecoming photos upon a teams success. Domiy (talk) 01:41, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Most likely you won't be able to use any non-free images of the team's homecoming because it's highly unlikely such a photo would pass WP:NFCC#1; so anything from an official news website, etc. it probably not going to be able to be used. You might try checking for personal photos on sites like Flickr, Instagram. etc. Anything licensed as "Some Rights Reserved" is probably OK to be uploaded to Commons. You'll need to find images which don't place any restrictions on commercial or derivative use as shown in c:COM:CC. You also need to be fairly sure that the Flickr account holder, etc. is the original copyright holder and didn't just upload someone else's work per c:COM:LL. It might be good to ask at c:COM:VPC about any image you think is OK just to see what others say. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:06, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

@Domiy: can you link to the image you are referring to? I'd like to see if we can upload it under the licenses Marchjuly has mentioned. To be honest, I don't know a whole lot about licensing, but I'm willing to try somethings out. I think Marchjuly has laid out some cool resources, I'm going to snoop around. If you want to do so as well go to Flicker, find an image, and see if it has the right licenses here. LivinRealGüd (talk) 02:46, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: Thanks so much for clarifying that! I'll search around with that in mind. Are you also able to advise on copyrights for audio files? Would it be OK to snip the audio out of someone else's home-made video on YouTube? I would like to use this in the Supporters section to highlight the prominence of orchestrated chants among Croatian supporters. Preferably from a video like this Domiy (talk) 07:43, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Non-free audio clips are sometimes allowed for articles about songs, etc. per WP:NFC#Audio clips, but it might be hard to justify non-free use per WP:NFCC#8 for what you're describng above. You might want to ask at WT:NFC about this. Like Flickr, etc. you need to be careful of WP:YOUTUBE because of WP:COPYLINK. I beleive that YouTube's general licesning requirements are now compatible with c:COM:L per c:COM:YT, but the problem is that people often upload content that they didn't create or don't hold the copyright on. Freely licensed audio/video files can be uploaded to Commons per c:Commons:Audio, but you probably should ask at c:COM:VPC first about something from YouTube before uploading it. -- 07:55, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

@LivinRealGüd: I'm not particularly fond of this wording: Exactly twenty years later, anchored by their second "Golden Generation", Croatia reached the 2018 World Cup Final after finishing all tournament stages undefeatedand secured second place to France, providing the tournament's best player, Luka Modrić. -- "Second golden generation" doesn't sound encyclopedic, as it's a term coined by a media outlet. Either way, it's contradictory as a team should only have one golden generation, hence the name (as hard as it is to get used to, the 98 team is officially no longer the golden generation). They weren't undefeated in all tournament stages either as they lost in the final. I'd recommend changing it to Exactly twenty years later, anchored by their golden generation, Croatia reached the 2018 World Cup Final and featured the tournament's best player, Luka Modrić. Domiy (talk) 13:41, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Sure, that sentence sounds good. I just wanted it to include the golden generation remark and the Modrić section. Please update. I believe they were undefeated at the tournament stages. They won all six games leading up to the final (the only team, I believe, to do so). France tied with Denmark in Group C. Perhaps we can reword it so its more clear. Had they won the final, the would have won the World Cup undefeated. Notable as teams may lose a game (even two) and still win the World Cup. Croatia lost to France at the World Cup, but they did win every game leading up to the final. Something to think on. LivinRealGüd (talk) 23:27, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Technically, they drew 2 games and only advanced on penalties. That doesn't count as a victory or a loss for either team (so Denmark were actually undefeated as well, they didn't lose a single game in normal play - they were eliminated on penalties). Had they won the final, Croatia wouldn't be the only team to 'win' all their games either - France did it in 98, as did Brazil in 2002. Netherlands won all their games before the final in 2010 too, so it wouldn't be a new record for Croatia, unfortunately.Domiy (talk) 04:29, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Ah got it. Could we at least leave the "securing second place" bit? Thank you good sir, nice edits here and here! LivinRealGüd (talk) 14:34, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Non-free use of File:Croatia national football team crest.svg

A png version of the team badge/crest was perviously discussed at Wikipedia:Non-free content review/Archive 69#File:Croatia football federation.png and the consensus was that the non-free use of the badge only complies with Wikipedia's non-free content use policy for the Croatian Football Federation and shouldn't be used in any of the individual national team articles. The only difference between the svg version and the png file appears to be the file format, and just changing the file fornat in and of itself is not a sufficient justification to overide a close achieved at NFCR. So, if someone feels that the non-free use of this file in Croatia national football team or any other individual team articles does comply with relevant Wikipedia policy, please follow the instructions in WP:CLOSECHALLENGE. A consensus may change overtime per WP:CCC, but a new consensus will likely need to be established via WP:FFD to overturn the previously NFCR one. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:13, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Marchjuly, I think the article would look better with a logo... do you have any advice about how to get a logo. It looks like the articles France national football team and Germany national football team have one, how can the article get one? Sorry, I don't know anything about how this works... Thanks. LivinRealGüd (talk) 12:18, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Marchjuly, The logo has correct non free licensing of itself on the Croatian Football Federation which is also regarded as the owner/control authority of the national team. The logo is not distinctive to the Federation but it used to represent the national team. KarimKoueider (talk) 12:37, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

@LivinRealGüd and KarimKoueider: I hope you don't mind me replying to both of you in the same post. Anyway, as I posted above, there was a consensus established that only the use of this particular file in the article about the federation complies with Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. This is consistent with previous discussions at WP:NFCR, WP:FFD and WT:NFC (you have to check the archives for specific examples) about the use of these types of files in individual team articles. There have also been discussion about the use of such files in articles about other national sports teams (e.g., cricket, hockey, volleyball, baseball, etc.) and the consensus has pretty much been the same. For sure, there are probably lots of article about national teams where such files are being used, but that could just be because of WP:NOBODYCOMPLAINED and not because the non-free use is considered to be policy compliant. People are adding non-free files to articles all the time without considering whether the particular non-free use complies with relevant policy. Sometimes this is because they just don't know about the policy, but other times it's because they do know about the policy and just don't care. Some people think all you need is to do is add a non-free use rationale, but that's not always the case per WP:JUSTONE. Others think that just because a similar file is being used in a similar way in another article means that it must be also OK to use the file they want to use in the same way, but that's not always the case per WP:OTHERIMAGE. The German national team and the German Football Association use different branding, and the same seems to be the case for the French Football Federation and the French national team; so, perhaps that's why the non-free use of those two files in those articles hasn't been challenged yet. So, if the Croation Federation uses a different logo, then maybe that should be uploaded for the federation article, and this one then used only in the national team article.

If either of you want to discuss the non-free use of this particular file, you should follow the suggestions made in WP:CLOSECHALLENGE and see what the editor who closed the discussion has to say. A consensus may change over time, but (as I pointed out above) that might require a new discussion at WP:FFD. On the other hand, if either of you want to discuss the non-free use of these types of files in general, then the place to do so would be a WT:NFC. In general, the national federation/association is considered to be the "parent entity", while the individual teams are considered to be "child entities" per item 17 of WP:NFC#UUI; so, the non-free use of a badge/crest in the federation/article is typically considered to be OK, but the non-free use of the same file in the individual team article is generally not. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:53, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: "Blind and mindless enforcement of rules on exclusively technical grounds" - Benstown ... KarimKoueider (talk) 23:53, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

@KarimKoeider. You don't have to ping me in every post. I have this page on my watchlist, so I should see any new posts. Also, please see WP:CANVASS with respect to this post you made on Benstown's user's talk page. If you want to let others know about a partiuclar discussion, it's probably best to do so using a {{Please see}} since it's simple to use and only contains a link. Furthermore, see Wikipedia:Non-free content review/Archive 56#File:Confederação Brasileira de Futebol (escudo).svg for the first time the Brazillian logo was discussed and subsequently removed, That discussion is from 2014, and pretty much exemplifies how the WP:NFCC is being applied to this type of logo use. Just for reference, Wikipedia's non-free content use policy has intentionally benn made to be quite restrictive, and, as I posted above, there have been some pretty long discussions on this type of file use at WT:NFC (even prior to 2014), but none of them really resulted in a clear consensus being established in favor of their use on national team articles. That doesn't mean that a new consensus cannot be established, however, but it might indicate that doing so might not be so easy and require time.

Finally, there's also possibly another issue (WP:NFCC#3b) with the svg versions of logos team logos which you've seem to have been recently creating which might apply here as well. While Wikipedia does allow non-free svg files to be uploaded and us it's not clear whether all such svg files are automatically OK. If an official version of an svg file which is provided by the original copyright holder can be found, then usually there's no problem; however, things are not always so clear with respect user-created svg versions of png files, etc. because the svg version in and of itself might have it's own copyright or it might be slightly different than the official logo released by the relevant organization. There also might be an issue related to image resolution for user-created svgs which may make meeting the NFCC a bit unclear. You can find some relevant discussion at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 67#Rethinking vector policy Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 64#Non-free images and SVG and Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 64#Vector images of non-free logos from unofficial sources, but there are more examples found in the archives of WT:NFC or WP:MCQ. Personally, I think the png version File:Croatia football federation.png was probably fine for non-free use on Wikipedia, so I'm not sure why it needed to be replaced since the positives of having a svg file are not so great due to the limitations placed on how it can be used by the NFCC. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: I spend time replacing png or jpg logos with vector ones to better improve on Wikipedia's content. If you think "the positives of having a svg file are not so great" then there's no point in ever improving wikipedia if we dont spend time and effort perfecting it. NFCC guidelines may limit pixel sizes on svg logos but that doesnt deter from their inferior quality while pages are being viewed on different resolutions across multiple devices. Wikipedia is nothing without the readers and editors behind it. Improving the experience for the reader even if its a minor detail like a logo in an infobox, is ALWAYS worth it. Thank You and I hope you see where im getting at with this small rant. KarimKoueider (talk) 17:38, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: can you please help me find the proper alternative? It looks like the HNS logo removed is the only one that is representative of the Croatian national football team. Thats their only logo. Does that mean that this article doesn't get a logo? LivinRealGüd (talk) 00:29, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

@LivinRealGüd. Non-free use is not considered to be automatic per WP:NFCCP, and there is no requirement that any article have an image or images; so, technically speaking, "no infobox" image is considered an acceptable outcome and there are in fact many articles (not only articles about sprots teams) which don't have an infobox image because the use of a non-free one wouldn't comply with relevant policy and guidelines. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:08, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Yeah I see Bahrain national football team and Brazil national football team don't have logos. Hmm.. okay. I might ping you again later on if I have any more questions. Thank you! LivinRealGüd (talk) 03:53, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Edit request

When will be the logo in Croatia national football team?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.142.68.155 (talk) 17:31, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

There is no requirement that a image be used in the main infoboxes of articles; they can be used when done so in compliance with relevant Wikipedia policies, but only in such cases. The non-free use of the Croatian team badge was previously discussed as explained above, and the consensus was that it's use in this article doesn't comply with Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. A consensus can change over time, but a new consensus in favor of using the file needs to be established before the file can properly be re-added to the article. You can try to establish a new consensus if you like via WP:FFD, but you might want to first discuss things with Brustopher first since he is the editor who closed the above-mentioned discussion. You can also ask for other opinions at WT:NFCC if you like. I understand that similar files are being used on similar national team articles, but not every file is licensed the same way and not every circumstance for non-free use is the same as explained in WP:OTHERIMAGE; it's quite possible that some of these other uses are also not policy-compliant, and just have not been properly discussed yet. Anyway, the point is that what happens on other articles with other files is not really relevant to this particular files non-free use. Your best chance of having the file someday eventually re-add to the article is to stop trying to do so via edit warring and instead try to do so according to Wikipedia policy. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:51, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2

HNS and FIFA statistics

A few of the matches that are recognized by the HNS are not recognized by FIFA, which results in slight statistical inconsistencies regarding head-to-head records, players' caps and goals, and the like. For example Darijo Srna, the most capped player, has won 134 caps according to the HNS but just 132 according to FIFA, because the former tally includes two non-recognized friendlies: vs Gibraltar in 2015 (Gibraltar was not a FIFA member at the time) and vs Belgium in 2010 (too many substitutes were made during the match). --Theurgist (talk) 13:36, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Croatia, Yugoslavia, Serbia... one and the same?!

I dare you to open the following link, which serves as a reference to the statement of "unofficial Croatian teams winning games as a Yugoslav team playing as 'Serbia'" and you may win free spins. Splićanin (talk) 15:17, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Head to head scores with Belgium

Hello, I would like to report an error in section where head to head scores are counted. Croatia played a friendly match vs Belgium in 2010 and won 1 - 0 in Brussels (Kranjčar - 63'). Here is the link to the report of this game - https://hrnogomet.com/reprezentacija/utakmica.php?id=207&tab=1&lang=en . So if we count this game into head to head section, we've got 3 Croatia's wins (2002 WCQ, 2004 EQ and this friendly game), 2 draws (2002 WCQ, 2014 WCQ) and 2 Belgium's wins (2004 EQ and 2014 WCQ). Thank you for reading this and I hope that the error will be fixed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mazximo (talk • contribs) 08:14, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

All Time Results

Main article: Croatia national football team results

The following table shows Croatia's all-time international record, correct as of 16 Nov 2020.

Against	Played	Won	Drawn	Lost	GF	GA
Total	326	170	85	69	563	330

https://www.worldfootball.net/teams/kroatien-team/21/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bilamata (talk • contribs) 21:15, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Not a FIFA member? Wrong information.

There is wrong information here. It says that Croatia wasn't a FIFA member in 1994. Wrong. Croatia (CFF) was admitted to FIFA on July 17th (or 16th, unclear, depending on source) 1941, shortly after (Independent State of) Croatia gained it's independence from Yugoslavia (officially April 10, 1941). ISC fell apart in May 1945, and Yugoslavia was renewed. But Croatian Football Federation (CFF) membership was never discontinued. Due to difficult (communist) political situation, CFF team didn't compete, and players played for Yugoslavia. But even in that period there was at least one friendly game Croatia played as Croatia. And because of political situation in early 90's Croatia (modern day) didn't want to be recognized as continuation of WW2 Croatia. Too complicated to explain, and not necessary here. So some sort of re-admission to FIFA was organised, even though we were already a member. It was on July 3, 1992. Also, Croatia was admitted to UEFA for the first time on June 16, 1993. It is impossible that Croatia was not a FIFA member in 1994. But Croatia wasn't allowed to play. Political games. It was war in Croatia, with unclear outcome, and many in the West hoped that Yugoslavia will be again renewed, this time in it's democratic form. But it didn't happen. So Croatia was allowed to compete on Euro 1996 and WC 1998. I even remember Croatia's coach Miroslav Blažević talking about this political issue. But I have no source at the moment. Anyway, please correct the mistake. --Zekoslavac (talk) 22:25, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Head-to-Head: Pre- and Post-independence; official and unofficial matches

I think that having two separate tables – pre- and post-independence is unnecessary and confusing.

First, are we going to strictly divide matches between before and after actual independence, that is 25 June 1991? If so, then matches played against Slovenia and the United States in 1991 count as pre-independence?

My proposal is that we merge both tables for the sake of simplicity. Croatia's national football team has legal continuation with the team established in 1940 – both FIFA and the present-day Croatian Football Association recognise this.

The only logical way to avoid this pre- and post-independence conundrum is to merge the tables.

If Scotland would become an independent nation, should we also create two separate tables? I think not. It's silly.

The team played as a Croatian team, both before and after independence. The changes in the political situation didn't affect this very much, since the team existed either way. The existence of Yugoslavia or independent Croatia is irrelevant to the existence of the Croatia national football team, since the team was established when Croatia wasn't independent, played when Croatia wasn't independent, and plays after Croatia became independent.

Second, my proposal is that we should count only official matches, that is, the matches that both Croatia Football Association and the football association of the opponent count as official (regardless of Croatia's membership in FIFA, since official matches were played before FIFA was established).

If we were to count unofficial matches, then we should count in matches against Vojvodina, Bosnia and Herzegovina, etc, from 1945, which, I believe we can all agree, seems silly. --Governor Sheng (talk) 00:05, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Head-to-head record

I've tried to fix what I see as a problem in this section before.

Namely, it is impossible to purposefully use all the possibilities of the table, that is, to make a schedule of the table according to the number of matches played with an individual national team.

The result is a confused order of national teams Croatia played with "before" and "after independence".

I can understand the division itself, however, then two separate tables should be made, or if not, then remove this division of pre-independence and post-independence matches. Governor Sheng (talk) 14:44, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Shirt Badge/Association Crest issue

According to this discussion, the logo for the Croatia Football Federation can't be used in pages besides the page for the federation. There have been several attempts to add rationale to the file page of the logo or use the logo for the page on the team, but ultimately the main reason those edits are undone is the linked discussion. This is kind of a problem since the logo is also used on the shirts of the players.

The actual badge on the shirt has some minor differences like the ball at the bottom having fully white gaps. Maybe if something like that was uploaded to Wikipedia with a rationale (the badge is non-free), we'd be able to use it for this page and have the actual badge instead of the Croatian flag. PaTeKor (talk) 02:17, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

Is it possible to ask some sort of a permission from the HNS? Governor Sheng (talk) 21:27, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

'Volatile ranking'

Croatia's FIFA ranking may the 'most volatile' as a statement of fact, but it's essentially a false figure, since they started at the very bottom of the system as a new country, quickly moved to the top fifth of the places and have stayed there for 20 years. Looking at the chart from the article, I have removed the first four years which involved a rapid increase (no decrease, so not very volatile) up to qualifying for Euro 96 and it can be seen that since then there has only been a fluctuation between about 20 places - I haven't checked, but pretty sure a lot of countries will have far more varied placings than that. At least, I would suggest that the volatile thing is not sufficiently important to be mentioned in the lead. It is Croatia's consistency near the top in spite of the size of the country that is worthy of comment, not the supposed variation in rankings that is actually an incompletely explained statement. Crowsus (talk) 14:01, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

The team's ascension in the world rankings is a highly notable statistical abnormality. Volatility refers to the degree of variation over time – not directional movement. You're thinking about variability. It quantifies the bifurcation of Croatian footballing talent following their separation from the Yugoslavia national football team, and to a lesser extent, Southeast Europe. Croatia rocketed 122 spots in four years. This references both speed (time) and distance (ranking), and as such, the current wording of "fastest, most volatile ascension" proves to be the most accurate. It is also mathematically supported by the high Elo rating of Croatia. 2601:645:8300:20D0:2D94:777E:DEDE:4C27 (talk) 20:21, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Afghanistan national football team which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 15:21, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Wrong statistic

Coaching history (total number of matches) and H2H history (total matches) numbers don't add up. 31.217.5.60 (talk) 08:43, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

H2H includes only official matches. Governor Sheng (talk) 15:48, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Competitive record

It is wrong to list all World cups and all European championships in Croatia competitive record. Croatia didn't exist before 1991. as an independent country so they coudn't compete. Croatia is competing since 1996. for Euro and 1998. for World cup. So their participation is 6/7 for World cup and 6/7 for Euro. Which is impressive. It's not 6/22 for WC or 6/16 for Euro. Pp (talk) 10:29, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Croatia's performance is indeed impressive, but the record clearly states that the country was a part of Yugoslavia back then. Governor Sheng (talk) 15:48, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Afghanistan national football team which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 14:51, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

First match 1907?

Official HNS/CFF website says Croatia's first ever match was against Czech team Slavia Prague, Slavia won 15:2. Why isn't this match mentioned here? 86.33.85.149 (talk) 18:33, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Because, the HNS doesn't consider it to be an official one. It was a hybrid friendly. Here are the matches considered official by the HNS: https://rezultati.hns.team/?cid=FC%20A&dt1=1.1.1900.&dt2=31.12.2024.&pg=38 Governor Sheng (talk) 19:34, 19 October 2023 (UTC)